The rise of the ‘shy Tory’: why pollsters are missing voters on the right

At 10pm British Daylight Time on May 7th, seconds after the polls closed, the various media outlets covering the UK General Election unveiled the results of the giant exit poll commission by a consortium of British polling companies. Anyone who watched this coverage will never forget the barely suppressed shock that the Conservatives were estimated to win 316 seats some 25 seats more than the most optimistic opinion polls published days before the ballot. Lord Ashdown (a former Liberal Democrat MP and leader in the Commons) expressed such disbelief at the veracity of the exit poll that he said if he was wrong, he’d eat his hat! Ashdown’s disbelief in the exit poll’s numbers was vindicated but not the way he’d hoped because it too underestimated the scale of the Tories’ success. Cameron was to retain the premiership with an absolute majority and 331 seats actually increasing the Conservatives’ percentage of the vote – a result dramatically different than the one anticipated by virtually all observers of the campaign.

The English media have been awash with hand wringing analyses as to why the polls were so wrong and why Labour lost so badly. Almost all pre-election commentary revolved around likely coalition negotiations with many pundits picking a Labour/SNP/Green coalition. Milliband, on the strength of some one-eyed reports from polling stations, reportedly told his front bench late in the day to be humble in victory when interviewed by the media so convinced was he, despite the predicted Scottish SNP landslide, that Nicola Sturgeon would join him in the governing coalition.

The failure of the mainstream pollsters to pick this win (only an 18,000 strong on-line Spider Monkey survey had picked the eventual 37/31 Conservative/Labour split) has been put down to the behaviour of the so-called ‘shy Tory’. This term was first coined by John Heyward (now a Conservative MP) when he was John Major’s pollster in the 1992 election to explain why pre-election polls pointing to a Kinnock led Labour victory were wrong. Essentially Tory leaning voters lied to the pollsters.

In recent years, this underestimating of actual voter turnout of centre-right parties by reputable polling companies has become a recent global phenomenon. On top of the UK Election of May 2015 we can add similar polling failures in the:

NZ Election September 2014 (almost all polls pointed to NZ First holding the balance of power whereas the Key led Nats managed an election night absolute majority. Even though this was clawed back by special votes and the Northland by-election, Key, like Cameron, managed to increase National’s share of the vote from the previous election)

EU Elections May 2014 (polls missed the sizable swing to UKIP in the UK portion of the EU Parliament Elections)

Some of the reasons why Tories (or supporters of right leaning parties) have become so shy with indicating their voting intentions to pollsters are:

The Left’s vitriol means conservatives are more likely to stay mum
The left believe they have the moral high ground and to oppose their policies is at best bad and inhumane and at worst, downright evil. More on the left see politics and legislative action as the most important force for good in the world – the power of the state to ensure good outcomes as they see it. More on the right see the state as far from a benign force for good and derive satisfaction outside of politics from family activity, humanitarian efforts in the community and organized religious involvements. This moral superiority the left feel they have infuses their political debating with self-righteous indignation sometimes propelling them to more nasty and personal attacks on their opponents. Opponents are more likely to be labeled with extreme epithets to discount and shut down their views (e.g. homophobe, racist, heartless, greedy, uncaring).

Many on the right quickly tire of these abusive ad hominem attacks. When you add that the left has a core of activists who are driven to the political theatre almost 24/7 and for whom warfare with the right is an article of faith and a rite of passage, it makes for a palpable ‘take no prisoners’ approach to debating their opponents. Ordinary right leaning voters who engage on social media on the issues of the day in the run up to elections are routinely subjected to vitriolic attacks often in an almost coordinated way from a myriad of well-armed and argumentative left leaning activists such that they withdraw from the battlefield and learn to keep their opinions to themselves. Fearing further opprobrium for supporting a right leaning party when asked by a pollster, voters from the right often will either lie as to their party leaning or that they are undecided when they are already a committed Tory voter. The left’s aggressive approach to political debate is one of the biggest reasons for shy Tories.

Labour in the UK claimed to have won the Twitter campaign and the social media battle but ended up losing the war that counts – the actual election not realising that the Twittersphere is not the same as swing voter land. The young are disproportionately represented on Twitter and social media debates and they are more likely to tilt left and be vocal about it BUT less likely to vote. The left have rendered open discussion in favour of a number of contentious issues such as immigration reform or against gay marriage and Islamic extremism as not appropriate opinions for citizens to hold in a modern progressive society. They have effectively driven a significant minority of the electorate out of the public square and off the debating stage. The left’s bullying has a number of perverse effects on approved speech thus silencing public dissent. These attempts don’t sway voter opinion in their favour but merely strengthen the resolve of the un-listened-to voters to get out and vote for the leaders and parties the left so despise.

The notion of what is appropriate discourse even effects the pollsters. One admitted to deciding not to poll on contentious issues of concern to right leaning voters like on excessive Muslim immigration or welfare reform for fear of the public backlash from the vocal left.

Elite opinion makers have become more disconnected from median voters
The chattering classes overwhelmingly tilt to the left. Even right leaning public commentators often hold more socially liberal views than floating voters and can be more sensitive to elite opinion when it turns on them for their more conservative views. Because the commentariat tend to mostly talk to each other, they become cut off from median voter opinion which is more right leaning and conservative. They are then shocked when majority opinion votes the opposite to them. This disconnect is manifest in a number of ways:

* Rise of militant Islam is ignored by the chattering classes but is of more concern to centrist swing voters but is a topic rarely canvassed in media panel discussions or debates for fear of offending Muslims. This sort of political correctness reached absurdity when Milliband proposed to ban Islamophobia. Where are moderate centrist voters to turn if their reasonable concerns are blatantly ignored by a major opposition party seeking power? The rise of UKIP saw the Conservatives trying to engage more on these contentious issues and thus were seen to be more likely to respond to voter concerns.

* Beltway types look past the deficiencies of the left’s standard bearer in their desperate quest to get their man across the line. Milliband was a nerdy policy wonk who came across as awkward and goofy, who decried business, refused to disavow the profligate spending of the Labour government he was a minister in and banked on dissatisfaction with the austerity measures to propel centrist voters to his more leftist vision for Britain in much the same way a more left leaning Cunliffe hoped NZ Labour would get out the so-called missing million.

* Euroscepticism is a subject that brings out the most dismissive and arrogant tut tutting from elites who have frequently disdained the rise of UKIP and the popularity of Nigel Farrage in his call for an EU referendum. Cameron successfully neutralised the electoral fallout for the Conservatives from UKIP by promising the In/Out referendum. Shy Tories who favour Brexit again felt shouted at and ignored by beltway commentators and Labour.

New media allows those on the right to break the MSM’s monopoly on reporting
Whilst Britain has sported an ideologically varied print media for some decades now, the commentariat on TV, radio, the political scientist and the political reporting class reliably tilt to the left. The internet has shattered that monopoly and, along with You Tube and other user driven broadcast sites, enabled the growth of right wing blogs and right wing on line magazines and newspapers. This has enabled shy Tories to read more about politics from a perspective they understand and sympathise with. It reinforces their suspicion of the commenting class and of the mainstream media and journalists and adds to their shyness with pollsters.

Other factors that helped Cameron: Voter preference for stability
Incumbency often provides some advantage to the ruling party. In the UK, voters less familiar with coalition government even after five years of the Lib Dems deal with the Tories, were genuinely spooked by what the polls were pointing to – a Labour Party that would get fewer seats than the Conservatives but be able to govern with the help of the resurgent Scottish National Party. Not only would the harder left SNP tail wag Labour’s dog, the very state of the United Kingdom would be at stake a mere six months after the Scottish voted reasonably decisively to stay with England. However ambivalent voters may have felt about Cameron, they saw a Conservative led government as more stable and more likely to fight for the union.

“It’s the economy stupid”
The left made much of the Tory’s austerity programme fuelled by media stories of those effected. Middle class Brits with jobs saw an improving job market, falling unemployment, rising incomes and property values as helping their own personal financial stability and, like their Kiwi counterparts in 2014, voted for a continuation of the government that was perceived to be fiscally sounder and whose fiscal rectitude through tough times saw better economic times return. Like Cunliffe’s ‘true red Labour’ shift, Milliband was seen as appealing more to the Hampstead Fabian Society by attacking big business and seeking a return to the spendthrift days of other more left leaning Labour governments than the more successful centrist approach adopted by Blair to New Labour’s electoral advantage.

Hutty

Long time reader, seldom commenter. As a young, right leaning voter who, as I would consider engaged in social media, nothing has been better than seeing the leftist’s squealing post the Tory win. It doesn’t get much better than wound up “Social Justice Warriors”. Especially on Facebook and Twitter. It’s laughable how some people remove right leaning friends and followers. No wonder they can’t believe the results!

KIA, completely agree with the left’s shutting down of taboo topics. In person and on social media, to simply put an alternative view/idea forward renders one being labelled racist/homophobe/uncaring/capitalist swine etc. The only response to a thought out alternate opinion is one of those words. Then consider the debate over.

Alan Wilkinson

BeaB

“New media allows those on the right to break the MSM’s monopoly on reporting
Whilst Britain has sported an ideologically varied print media for some decades now, the commentariat on TV, radio, the political scientist and the political reporting class reliably tilt to the left. The internet has shattered that monopoly and, along with You Tube and other user driven broadcast sites, enabled the growth of right wing blogs and right wing on line magazines and newspapers. This has enabled shy Tories to read more about politics from a perspective they understand and sympathise with. It reinforces their suspicion of the commenting class and of the mainstream media and journalists and adds to their shyness with pollsters.”

So true for me and many I know. We mistrust just about everything we read and hear in the MSM and turn to this blog and even silly old WO to get the truth.

KiwiGreg

I remember seeing a tweet in the election 2015 thread on the Twitter after the election that read something like “I can’t understand this result. All my friends think the way I do and so does everyone I follow”.

The internet can become an echo chamber shutting out alternate views not opening people up to them.

Alan Wilkinson

F E Smith

The left have rendered open discussion in favour of a number of contentious issues such as immigration reform or against gay marriage and Islamic extremism as not appropriate opinions for citizens to hold in a modern progressive society.

This, very much this. A trend that the news media also engages in to a large extent. According to the Left, views may only be expressed if they are valid. If they are not valid, you can hold them but you may not express them openly.

Makes this item on Powerlineblog that links to The Onion well worth viewing. Also the youtube video is worth playing.

Akaroa

“Why did the pollsters get it so wrong?”

Simple!. Speaking as an English-born Kiwi I can tell you that most British people are privately unprepared to reveal their voting habits.

In fact i’ll go further and say they are resentful of some so-called ‘Exit-Pollster” – (Ha!) – sticking a clip-board in their face as they leave the polling booth and asking that most private of all private questions, ‘Who did you vote for?”

I know what my reaction would be if so confronted!.

I’d give any impertinent, pushy, political nosey-parker the bummest steer I could. “Oh, I voted Communist, of course” – having actually voted True Blue from way back.

One day they’ll learn that your average Brit doesn’t take kindly to being quizzed like that. UK is not America y’know!!

And one’s political preferences are – in my book – amongst the most private of personal information.

hmmokrightitis

Hence the claims of fraud from some parts of the left after our last election here in NZ.

I have numerous left leaning friends (dont judge me 🙂 ) and some – generally the smarter ones, I will happily engage with. The majority though, it has to be said, I dont bother with anymore. As soon as I hear them spout the word Tory, that for me is the moment – I know they arent interested in discussion or debate, so I just dont bother.

Likewise, I keep my politics to myself. Those who merely shout slogans arent interested in discussion, let alone debate, and seek to brand guys like me as right wing bastards. Not withstanding the people I employ, the tax I pay, etc etc.

So, fuck em. Long live the shy tory. Better that then the vaccuous shouty socialist.

Alan Wilkinson

Akaroa

Hi Alan W. at 5.06.

I take your point, but this doesn’t alter the fact that certainly in the run-up to elections many – yes many – UK people are so resentful of the invasion of their voting privacy that they react as i have suggested.

I guess that by the time the votes are in the box one can reasonably ‘Come clean’ about one’s voting habit if one so wishes.

No-one will ever know for sure how I vote though, entry, exit or whatever polls you’d like to come up with!!

Scott1

Or maybe a lot of people are just honestly making their mind up in the booth and when they do that they are picking the candidate that appears to be the safe pair of hands (or the one that looks like a nice man) – and usually that is the candidate of business rather than the candidate of the left.
(although in the case of Israel it is the one that looks strong on military)

emmess

Scott1

Or maybe David can comment on the possibility of another option.
People of the left saying they will vote (or otherwise making the pollsters think they are likely voters) and then failing to do so. Maybe more of this group are saying they will vote (for example with the encouragement of left activists) and yet no more are actually voting (for the normal reasons regarding being too busy or whatever).

this could explain a drop for parties like the Liberal Democrats without requiring a more complicated shift from them to labor and then from labor to the conservatives.

waikatogirl

radvad

“The left believe they have the moral high ground and to oppose their policies is at best bad and inhumane and at worst, downright evil.”
Love your work KIA but disagree with the above statement. Deep down the left know their theories will never stand up to sound analysis so they do everything they can to avoid that happening. Hence the vitriol, it is all they have to offer.

Than

@mikenmild – I have no idea whether peterwn’s assertion is true or not… but if it was, they wouldn’t exactly be open about it. Political opinion is absolutely not legal grounds for dismissal. But if whenever there was a restructuring those expressing right-leaning views were the first to go, or whenever promotions came about it was always those with a left-lean that got them, that would be subtle and undetectable enough that nothing could be done about it.

Ed Snack

I think that there’s a lot in the immigration question. One of the major effects of this election is the decimation of the Lib-Dems, 57 seats down to 8. Most of those went to the Conservatives but some to Labour. This I ascribe to the LD losing that important tag, the “not the government” one. That was taken by UKIP, and UKIP took a lot votes from the Conservatives AND Labour, but, crucially, their vote was not concentrated in any one area so their significant vote was not matched by seats. And the Conservatives were a prime benficiary of that.

So why immigration, I think it is a subject hard to raise, as noted a lot above, to even attempt to discuss it can lead one to be labelled a racist. Yet it is a subject of some importance to the UK, especially as it has been revealed that the large increase in immigrant volumes under Labour was a deliberate policy to attempt to import “left-leaning” (and here read welfare loving) voters for specific political purposes regardless of the impact on British society and culture.

UKIP gave an outlet to those concerns, and they exist amongst a lot of old labour voters which is why UKIP did quite well across the north of England. And by taking votes from Labour it allowed the Conservatives to take seats from Labour, even though originally many though as the conventional wisdom had it, that UKIP votes came from the Conservatives.

Just FWIW.

And one other issue that possibly affected late choosers was the statements by the SNP that they would work to keep the Conservatives out of government. I think a lot of English voters took it quite badly that a bunch of welfare queens like the Scots would try to run UK politics for their own benefit in that way. There was a portion of the vote that was a big, fat, middle finger extended to the Scots. Who for all their skiting won’t have much impact on Westminster at all. If I were Cameron I’d be inclined to cut funding to Holyrood and tell the SNP to suck it up, losers.

Inthisdress

Kia’s analysis is in stark contrast to the hand-wringing at the Dimpost, where they are convinced that C&T have orchestrated an international right-wing conspiracy to dupe voters into not being able to hear the ‘left’s’ messages. Danyl’s ‘analysis’ suggests that C&T have superpowers that the Left ‘cannot do’. People who comment there (one especially comes to mind) is so convinced of his/her indisputable superiority of judgement, it borders on self-delusion.

But then, they would probably say the same of me.

Except they wouldn’t. Because to do so would involve getting off a self-erected intellectual pedestal and acknowledging some kind of parity of right to hold a political opinion, and a level of reflection and self-interrogation that would simply reek of heresy.

So the best they can muster when something might be true, but contrary to their view, is to denigrate it as ‘sympathy trolling’.

CharlieBrown

Very interesting read. Being of the right side of the political spectrum (ie, economically and socially liberal) I do tend to keep who I vote for secret due to the way many people take it personally and think I’m a racist, heartless, money hungry nazi. In fact this last election is the first time I openly admitted to people how I voted, which was to not vote due to the complete disenfranchisement I feel with all the parties on offer (that and being as sick as a leper on election night).

Although the left use vocal hate and vitriol to silence people that don’t agree with them, the center uses something similar by ridiculing anyone that challenges cultural norms. I recall John Keys ridicule of Brash on his perfectly logical and reasonable views on marijuana prohibition, and the ridicule of Jaimee Whyte’s comments when asked about incest. If you disagree with national the center’s reaction is to try to make people laugh at you or call you an extremist.

praxmeyer1967

CharlieBrown

tranquil – I don’t think that will happen, the definition of what is left wing vs right wing changes constantly. For instance if fifteen years ago a party formed that adopted all the policies of the current national party they would have been labeled as left wing.

And to be honest, our way of government is probably going to be seen as archaic in 500 to 1000 years in the future, just as we look back at governments 1000 to 2000 years from now. Likewise, most chinese people probably see democracy as we know it as a foreign and silly concept. All it will take is a world war, civil war, alien invasion, technological leap, global calamity caused by global warming, or no global calamity caused by global warming to drastically adjust our world view away from our current form of parliamentary democracy.

JC

Heh.. I wrote a long comment on “Shy Tories” and then realized I was giving away too much information and scrubbed the lot. Suffice to say that right now conservatives should encourage lefties to howl in the wilderness.

Fraggle

What a great and informative read! Thank you KIA. I have some left-leaning friends and yes they seem to think that anyone who sympathises with the right is uncaring, selfish and has no compassion or empathy. Nothing could be further from the truth. Having moved to London two weeks before the election I experienced the last frantic campaigning, especially by the left. Miliband meeting with Brand was quite incredible and desperate. I couldn’t help but see the mirroring of 2014 in NZ re election result and media post-mortems. Disappointed for Ukip, but very glad the Conservatives came through.

Shazzadude

” Key, like Cameron, managed to increase National’s share of the vote from the previous election”

2011: 47.31%

2014: 47.04%

?

I think the “shy tory” thing would appear to be a thing in Britain, given that the term “tory” can be quite polarising there. In New Zealand and the US not so much. Let’s not forget this author’s spectular failure in predicting the US presidential race, or that the 2014 NZ election was the first in some time to consistently underestimate National’s support throughout our major polling companies.

kiwi in america

Thanks guys – appreciate the kind words.

Radvad
There are some on the left that know deep down their proscriptions don’t work but just can’t make the break from their colleagues on the left partly because the vitriol that is heaped on traitors is the worse the left can dish out and they don’t want the drama. Almost all on the left rarely read or are exposed to critical analysis of their policies and so are content to live in a fantasy world. The failures of socialism are rationalized away by stating that the experiment was somehow flawed or not pure enough or sabotaged by US imperialist interference. Failure at the polls is put down to poor messaging, the right wing media (haha) or the dastardly Machiavellian dark arts of Karl Rove or Crosbie Textor. I’ve had some really knock down drag out fights on social media with lefties where I have made the decision to take the time to see the fight through to the end and they just can’t handle the truth. Facts are dismissed, the sources are denigrated as biased and they resort to name calling and epithet hurling when it’s clear they are losing. They just aren’t used to having their world view challenged. The most refreshing thing about becoming a ‘convert’ to the conservative side of the isle was to read the works of conservatives grounded in empirical fact, painstaking research and less steeped in reflexive ideological leanings.

kiwi in america

Shazzadude
National got 59 seats in 2011 and 60 seats in 2014. That is the increase. My point is that the 2014 result was not what the average of polls prior to the election was showing. FPP in the UK enabled the Conservatives to garner significantly more seats with a very minor increase in its vote. Had NZ been running FPP, National on 47% would’ve won in a massive landslide (look at the party vote in each electorate).

Your failed predictions of Labour victories in 2008, 2011 and 2014 of course mean we must all discount everything that you write here.

Shazzadude

“Share of the vote” to me would mean actual vote, not the number of seats won. I also never predicted Labour would win in 2008 or 2011, though there was a point in 2012 where I thought a Shearer-led Labour would win. I’m not sure why you felt the need to make that claim up.

You were predicting a Mitt Romney victory right up until the day of the 2012 presidential election. My point however wasn’t to embarrass you on your failed prediction, but rather to demonstrate that the trend you’re attempting to create isn’t there, given that you’ve included US politics in your assessment. You assessed the political landscape at the time and with the information you had you felt Republican support was being grossly underrepresented. The opposite ended up being true.

That being said I agree with you as far as the UK goes. It was a similar story to the 1992 UK election.

kiwi in america

Shazzadude
With respect to the Presidential election of 2012 you are right. You will note that the only US election I included was the 2014 mid terms (although the polls also underestimated the GOP wave in the 2010 mid terms when they took the House). The historic presence of Obama on the ticket resulted in unique turnout features. The turnout model used by some pollsters (including Romney’s) and various esteemed right leaning commentators assumed 2012 was going to be somewhat between the 2008 and 210 turnouts (the latter favouring Democrats due to Obama’s historic election and 2010 being the huge wave that swept out the Democrat majority in the House with a historic reversal). Obama’s team managed to replicate the 2008 turnout in the key swing states that mattered.

Not all elections fit the ‘shy Tory’ model for sure but it has become a discernible recent trend particularly where you have a somewhat controversial right leaning incumbent government up against a more left wing opponent.

Bruce Bayliss

As a Kiwi living in the UK for the last 15 years the outcome of the election was a given. A simple combination of ‘tory fear combined with a lacklustre, and to be fair, a plain odd Labour leader plus excellent economic data left the door open for the “finish the job” message. Sound familiar? Standard Crosby playground. The labour contenders lining up are equally as uninspiring and at the 11th hour the union tug will anoute their man for the inevitable result a few years later. 3 term Conservative government on the way…

The actual answer may have more to do with turnout and more effective focus on the undecided.

The more alienated may have a left wing preference but feel taken for granted and so they are less likely to turn out to vote.

And the right may have better resourcing for both profiling and targeting undecided voters.

KILL THE HERETIC!

Right-wing voters are lovely little hobbits who only venture out of their little hobbit holes to give people jobs, create wealth and do charity and they are absolutely not responsible for supporting wars in the Middle East which resulted in the mass-murder of hundreds of thousands of men, women and children. They are also definitely not involved in any policy decisions aimed at ‘monetising’ the public health and public education sectors. They also have definitely not been involved in denying the existence of global warming as a consequence of human industry; and the neo-liberal experiment which stripped wealth from everyone else and concentrated it in the pockets of the very rich was a complete surprise to them.

Nice work KIA, but I think you’ve missed a significant facet of the possible Labour-SNP deal, which is that it would have meant that there would be a Labour minority in England and Wales which could only pass legislation that affected England only (such as Education, or health which are powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament) with the help of Scottish MPs.

Rich Prick

If you’re under 35 and aren’t left of National, you might as well not bother discussing politics on social media.

Your peers (most of them politically VERY left, love nanny state in all its forms and want rich pricks to pay for everything) will regard you as a class traitor and it all gets very nasty, shrill and hysterical very quickly. Waste of time.

Bullion

New media allows those on the right to break the MSM’s monopoly on reporting

I do have an issue with this, and goes for people on either side of the political spectrum. The Internet has allowed people to find news sources and editorial content that matches their views, either on the left or right, but can make themselves more insular in their thinking.

Just saw this and encapsulates my point:

KiwiGreg (3,384 comments) says:
May 12th, 2015 at 4:48 pm
I remember seeing a tweet in the election 2015 thread on the Twitter after the election that read something like “I can’t understand this result. All my friends think the way I do and so does everyone I follow”.

The internet can become an echo chamber shutting out alternate views not opening people up to them.

Scott1

Within a political group people will tell each other they just need to get that extra person out to vote and they will win. It is a method of motivating the others, even if they don’t really believe it.

So at some point everyone has been telling everyone else in the group that it will be close but they will win if only they do X, Y and Z. obviously they are dong those things because they want to win. And in the end they all start believing their own propaganda.

But a smart person should be able to adjust for all of this. If nothing else they can tell from when are wrong in one election that the same bias is likely to apply to their evaluation of the next election.

Michael

I am basically against polls .If I got a phone call asking me which party I would most likely vote for I don’t know if I give the caller the correct answer. Also, I sometimes wonder if the media influences the swinging voter. I mean all that hoo-ha
about those leaked emails certainly made me firm up my mind as to which party I would vote for.